unit 2 writing about methodology - multimedia universitypesona.mmu.edu.my/~hairul/files/publication...

44

FA

Unit 2 ✏ Writing about Methodology

2.1 Structure

Th e title of this section varies in diff erent disciplines and in diff erent journals. It is sometimes called Materials and Methods, or it can be called Procedure, Experiments, Experimental, Simulation, Methodology or Model. Th is section is the fi rst part of the central ‘report’ section of the research article (the second part is the Results section), and it reports what you did and/or what you used.

Most journals publish (usually on the Internet) a Guide for Authors. Before you begin to read this unit, access the guide for a journal you read regularly — if you’re lucky, it will include a short description of what the editors expect in each section in addition to technical information relating to the fi gures. Here is a typical sentence from such a guide:

Th e Methodology should contain suffi cient detail for readers to replicate the work done and obtain similar results.

It is true that your work must contain suffi cient detail to be repeatable, but the type of writing you will need to do is not just a record of what you did and/or used. One of the most interesting and important changes you need to make in the way you write is that until now, you have probably been writing for people (perhaps your teachers) who know more about your research topic than you do. You have been displaying to them that you understand the tasks they have set and have performed them correctly. However, when you write a research article, people will be learning from you. Th erefore you now need to be able to communicate information about a new procedure, a new method, or a new approach so that everyone reading it can not only carry it out and obtain similar results, but also understand and accept your procedure.

B875_Chapter-02.indd 1B875_Chapter-02.indd 1 12/1/2009 10:42:42 AM12/1/2009 10:42:42 AM

Methodology — Structure 45

FA

When we come to ask our three questions:

• How do I start the Methodology/Experiments section? What type of sentence should I begin with?

• What type of information should be in this section, and in what order?• How do I end this section?

you already know that the Methodology should contain a detailed description of what you did and/or used, and this helps to answer the second of the three questions. As we will see, however, it is not a full answer; to be eff ective and conform to what is normally done in a research paper, this section must contain other important information as well.

Read the example below. Th e title of the paper is Changes in the chemistry of groundwater in the chalk of the London Basin. Don’t worry if the subject matter is not familiar to you or if you have diffi culty understanding individual words, especially technical terms like ground-water. Just try to get a general understanding at this stage and familiarise yourself with the type of language used.

RESULTS(what you found/saw)

METHODOLOGY(what you did/used)

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

centralreport

section

Fig. 1. Th e shape of a research article or thesis.


46 Science Research Writing

FA

2.2 Grammar and Writing Skills

Th is section deals with three language areas which are important in the Methodology:

PASSIVES AND TENSE PAIRSUSE OF ‘A’ AND ‘THE’ADVERBS AND ADVERB LOCATION

Methodology

1 Th e current investigation involved sampling and analysing six sites to measure changes in groundwater chemistry. 2 Th e sites were selected from the London Basin area, which is located in the south-east of England and has been frequently used to interpret groundwater evolution.2,3,4

3 A total of 18 samples was collected and then analysed for the isotopes mentioned earlier. 4 Samples 1–9 were collected in thoroughly-rinsed 25 ml brown glass bottles which were fi lled to the top and then sealed tightly to prevent contamination. 5 Th e fi lled bottles were shipped directly to two separate laboratories at Reading University, where they were analysed using standard methods suitably miniaturised to handle small quantities of water.5

6 Samples 10–18 were prepared in our laboratory using a revised version of the precipitation method established by the ISF Institute in Germany.6 7 Th is method obtains a precipitate through the addition of BaCl2.2H2O; the resulting precipitate can be washed and stored easily. 8 Th e samples were subsequently shipped to ISF for analysis by accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS). 9 All tubing used was stainless steel, and although two samples were at risk of CFC contamination as a result of brief contact with plastic, variation among samples was negligible.


Methodology — Grammar and Writing Skills 47

FA

2.2.1 Passives and tense pairs

When a sentence changes from active to passive, it looks like this:

Th e dog bit the policeman. active Th e policeman was bitten by the dog. passive

But in formal academic writing, when you report what you did, you don’t write ‘by us’ or ‘by me’ when changing the sentence from active to passive. You simply leave the agent out, creating an agentless passive:

We/I collected the samples. active Th e samples were collected. passive

Before you begin to write the description of what you did and used, you need to check with the Guide for Authors in your target journal (if you are writing a doctoral thesis in an English-speaking country, check with your supervisor) to fi nd out whether this part of the paper or thesis should be written in the passive or in the active. You can use the active (we collected) if you worked as part of a research team. Using the active is not usually appropriate when you write your PhD thesis because you worked alone, and research is not normally written up in the fi rst person singular (I collected). In most cases, you will fi nd that in papers and theses, the procedure you used in your research is described in the passive, either in the Present Simple passive (is collected) or in the Past Simple passive (was collected). To make that choice, it is useful to explore the advantages and disadvantages of each.

Th ere are two common errors in the way passives are used in this section. First, look at these two sentences:

(a) A fl exible section is inserted in the pipe. Present Simple passive

(b) A fl exible section was inserted in the pipe. Past Simple passive

When you write about what you did and what you used, you need to be able to distinguish between standard procedures, i.e. what is normally done or how a piece of equipment is normally constructed, and what you did yourself. In the examples above, (a) uses the Present Simple tense to describe what is normally done or to describe a standard piece of equipment used in the research and (b) uses the Past Simple tense to describe what you did yourself. It is conventional in this section to use the passive for



FA

both, and the agent of the action is not mentioned in the sentence — we don’t add ‘by the researcher’ or ‘by me’ at the end.

Passives used in formal writing are normally of this type, i.e. agentless passives. However, because the agent is not given, the only way that the reader can separate what is normally done (Sentence (a)) from what you did yourself (Sentence (b)) is if you use the correct tense. Check your target journal, but wherever possible it is clearer to use the Present Simple passive for what is normally done and the Past Simple passive to indicate what you did yourself.

You can see that if you don’t pay careful attention to the tense of these sentences, your own work may become confused with the standard procedures you are describing. Th is is a very common error, even among native speakers, and has serious consequences. If the reader cannot identify your contribution, that is a disaster! Look at this example:

Two dye jets are placed in the laser cavity. A gain jet is then excited by an argon ion laser and the pulses are spatially fi ltered in order to obtain a Gaussian beam. Polarisation is confi rmed using a polarising cube. Th e pulses were split into reference pulses and probe pulses and the reference pulses were carefully aligned into the detector to minimise noise levels.

In this case, splitting the pulses into two groups for testing was the signifi cant innovation of the writer’s research team but the only way the reader knows this is because of the change in tense from Present Simple passive to Past Simple passive (were split). Here is another example:

Samples for gas analysis were collected using the method described by Brown (1999), which uses a pneumatic air sampling pump.

Another diffi culty arises with the passive when you write about the procedure you used and compare it with the work of other researchers. You can use the Past Simple agentless passive to describe the procedure you used (the samples were collected using a suction tube) but you may also need to use exactly the same Past Simple agentless passive to describe the procedure used by the other researcher whose work you are citing (the samples were collected using a suction tube). Th is means that unless you are very careful, the reader has no way of separating your work from that



FA

of the other researcher. Th e fact that you are so familiar with what you did means that your own contribution is obvious to you — but it may not be obvious to your reader.

One way to make sure that your own contribution is clear and easy to identify is by marking it with words — perhaps by adding phrases like In this study, the samples were collected using a suction tube or In our experiments the samples were collected using a suction tube, and by identifying the procedure used by other researchers with careful references at the appropriate place in the sentence (In Brown (1999) the samples were collected using a suction tube).

Th ere are fi ve possible uses that you may need. Note the diff erent tenses.

What do you mean? How can you make it clear?

1 X was (collected/ substituted/adjusted etc.) by me in the procedure or work that I carried out

Either move to the active(We collected/adjusted/substituted etc.) or add words or phrases such as here/inthis work/in our model or usea ‘dummy’ subject such asTh is experiment/Th eprocedure

2 X was (collected/ substituted/adjusted etc.) by the person whose procedure or work I am using as a basis for, or comparing with, my own

Give a research reference and/or add words/phrases such as in their work/in that model

3 X is (collected/substituted/adjusted etc.) normally, i.e. as part of a standard procedure

You may need a research reference even if it is a standard procedure, depending on how well-known it is. Use phrases such as as in 5



FA

4 X is (collected/substituted/adjusted etc.) as you can see in Fig. 1, but it was collected/substituted/adjusted etc. by me

Move to the active (We collected/adjusted/substituted etc.) if you can or make sure that you come out of the Present Simple passive when you stop describing the fi gure

5 X is (collected/substituted/ adjusted etc.) by me in the procedure/work that I carried out, but my fi eld requires authors to write procedural descriptions in the Present Simple tense. (Th is is quite common in pure mathematics)

Either move to the active (‘We collect/adjust/substitute etc.) or add words or phrases such as here/in this work/in our model or use a ‘dummy’ subject such as Th is experiment/Th e procedure

SINGULAR COUNTABLE NOUNS NEED A DETERMINER

A determiner is a word like the, a, my, this, one, some. It’s a diffi cult rule to operate successfully because two problems need to be solved before you can use it. Firstly, it’s hard to know exactly which nouns are countable and, secondly, even when you know, how do you decide whether to use a or the?

Let’s look at the fi rst problem. Deciding which nouns are countable nouns and which aren’t isn’t as easy as it looks. Many nouns which are oft en

2.2.2 Use of ‘a’ and ‘the’

Th is is one of the most problematic areas of English grammar and usage. Many languages do not have separate words for a and the, and even if they do, these words may not correspond exactly to the way in which they are used in English. Students studying English as a second language are oft en given the following useful, but sometimes confusing, rule:



FA

considered uncountable can actually be used ‘countably’. Nouns like death or childhood, for example, can occur in the plural:

Th ere have been three deaths this year from pneumonia.Our childhoods were very diff erent; I grew up in France and she grew up in China.

and so can nouns like industry:

Many industries rely on fossil fuels.

Even names of materials like steel can occur in the plural:

Some steels are used in the manufacture of medical instruments.

In the following list of uncountable nouns, mark those which can also be used in the plural, i.e. countably. Th e way you use a noun determines whether it is used in its countable or uncountable form. So when you use a noun like industry, stop and think — do you mean industry in general (uncountable) or a particular industry (countable)? Check your answers in the Key.

absence access analysis advice age

agriculture cancer art atmosphere beauty

behaviour duty capacity childhood calculation

concern economy death democracy depression

design environment earth education electricity

energy evidence equipment existence experience

failure fashion fear fi re health

food freedom history growth independence

heat help insurance ice knowledge

industry information machinery intelligence light



FA

KEYTh e nouns which can also have a countable meaning appear in italics.

life luck philosophy nature loss

paper organisation pollution physics oil

power progress research protection policy

pressure reality security respect purity

rain sand strength silence safety

salt science time stuff sleep

swimming space trouble trade sunlight

transport technology waste truth traffi c

vision treatment water velocity violence

wildlife wind work wealth welfare

absence access analysis advice age

agriculture cancer art atmosphere beauty

behaviour duty capacity childhood calculation

concern economy death democracy depression

design environment earth education electricity

energy evidence equipment existence experience

failure fashion fear fi re health

food freedom history growth independence

heat help insurance ice knowledge

industry information machinery intelligence light

life luck philosophy nature loss

paper organisation pollution physics oil

power progress research protection policy



FA

Now look at the second problem: how do you decide whether to use a or the? You may have been told that a is used for general reference and the is used for specifi c reference, but in the following sentence:

Th ere is a book on the shelf above my desk; can you bring it here?

a book clearly refers to a specifi c book; in fact, that part of the sentence specifi es which book the speaker wants. So if the specifi c/general criterion doesn’t help you to select a or the, what does?

Start by asking yourself this simple question: Why do you use a the fi rst time you talk about something, but when you refer to it again you use the? Aft er all, it’s the same specifi c item on both occasions. For example, in the sentence below, why does the fi rst reference to the cheese sandwich use a and the second reference use the if both refer to the same specifi c sandwich?

I had a cheese sandwich and an apple for lunch. Th e sandwich was fi ne but the apple had a worm in it.

Th e diff erence is that the fi rst time the speaker mentions the cheese sandwich or the apple, only the speaker knows about them — but the second time, both the speaker and listener know. Th e worm, however, is ‘new’ to the listener, and so is referred to using a. Now we can add a new rule:

pressure reality security respect purity

rain sand strength silence safety

salt science time stuff sleep

swimming space trouble trade sunlight

transport technology waste truth traffi c

vision treatment water velocity violence

wildlife wind work wealth welfare

USE THE IF OR WHEN YOU AND YOUR READER BOTH KNOW WHICH THING/PERSON YOU MEAN.



FA

Th is is true even if the thing or person has not been mentioned before, for example, in the following sentences:

I arrived at Heathrow Airport but the check-in was closed.I bought a new computer but the keyboard was faulty.

check-in and keyboard need the because as soon as Heathrow Airport is mentioned, the speaker and listener know about and therefore share check-in; as soon as a computer is mentioned, they share keyboard. Similarly, in the sentence:

He lit a match but the fl ame went out.

mentioning a match automatically creates the concept of fl ame in the reader’s mind — and this shared understanding is marked by the use of the. Similarly, if we were in the same room and I told you to look up at the ceiling, you wouldn’t ask me ‘Which ceiling are you talking about?’ because it would be obvious; we would share it.

Did she get the job? (the job we both know she wanted)I’ll meet you in the library later. (the library we normally use)

Here are some more useful rules:

USE THE IF THERE IS ONLY ONE POSSIBLE REFERENT

We removed the soft est layer of membrane.Cairo is the capital of Egypt.Th e opening was located in the centre of each mesh.Government policy is committed to protecting the environment.Th e sun’s altitude is used to determine latitude.

USE A IF IT DOESN’T MATTER or YOU DON’T KNOW or YOUR READER DOESN’T KNOW WHICH THING/PERSON YOU ARE REFERRING TO.



FA

A 35 ml brown glass bottle was used to store the liquid. (It doesn’t matter which 35 ml brown glass bottle was used.)

Th e subject then spoke to an interviewer. (It doesn’t matter which interviewer/I know which one but you don’t.)

It works on the same principle as a combustion engine. (It doesn’t matter which combustion engine.)

Sometimes the choice of a or the changes the meaning of the sentence completely:

(a) Th is eff ect may hide a connection between the two. (Th ere may possibly be a connection between the two but if there is, we cannot see it.)(b) Th is eff ect may hide the connection between the two. (Th ere is defi nitely a connection between the two but we may not be able to see it because of this eff ect.)

Here’s another pair in which the choice of a or the has a signifi cant eff ect on the meaning (∅ is used here to indicate the plural of a):

(a) Th e nodes should be attached to ∅ two adjacent receptor sites. (Th ere are many receptor sites and any two adjacent ones will do.)(b) Th e nodes should be attached to the two adjacent receptor sites. (Th ere are only two receptor sites.)

Th e best way to use the information you have just learned is to take a paragraph from a research article that you are reading and use the information in this grammar section to work out why the writer has chosen each instance of the or a, or why the writer has not used any determiner before a particular noun.

Another important point to note about the use of a, the and ∅ is that they can all be used generically, i.e. when expressing a general truth:

Th e electroencephalograph is a machine for measuring brain waves. An electroencephalograph is a machine for measuring brain waves. Electroencephalographs are machines for measuring brain waves.

One last note: a is used before consonant sounds, while an is used before vowel sounds. Sound, not spelling, is important here, so we write an MRI scan because the letter ‘M’ is pronounced ‘em’, but a UV light because the letter ‘U’ is pronounced ‘yoo’.



FA

2.2.3 Adverbs and adverb location

When you are communicating complex ideas in another language, an obvious grammatical error is not as bad as an error which is invisible. A proofreader or editor will notice an obvious grammatical error and correct it, but if the sentence is written in grammatically correct English the error is not visible to proofreaders and editors. An example of an invisible error is where the sentence is grammatically correct but the choice of which verb tense to use is inappropriate or does not represent the intention of the writer. Th ese hidden errors are worrying because neither the writer nor the editor/proofreader knows they have occurred and yet the sentence does not mean what the writer intended.

Common hidden errors include mistakes in the use of a and the (see Section 2.2.2 above), whether or not to use a comma before the word which in relative clauses and adverb location errors. Adverb location errors are easy to make and hard to detect.

Adverbs don’t always do what you want or expect them to do. In the fi rst place, adverbs needing prepositions can be ambiguous (Look at that dog with one eye can either mean USING one eye or HAVING one eye) and in the second place, adverbs may attach themselves to unexpected parts of a sentence. Be careful where you put your adverb, and be especially careful if you are using more than one adverb in a sentence. Here is an example of the kind of problem you may encounter:

Th e patient was discharged from hospital aft er being shot in the back with a 9 mm gun.

Did the doctors shoot her?

He gave a lecture about liver cancer at the hospital last January.

Was the lecture in the hospital — or the cancer? Did the lecture refer to cancer cases occurring in January or did the lecture itself occur in January?

Although there are rules for adverb location, they are complex and hard to apply when you are writing. Since your aim is to stay safe and write clearly, it is better to avoid adverb clusters like these, and rewrite the information in a diff erent order. If your adverb relates to the whole


Methodology — Writing Task 57

FA

sentence (i.e. clearly, last January, as a result) then consider putting the adverb at the front of the sentence:

Last January he gave a lecture about liver cancer at the hospital

If you are still left with ambiguous adverb clusters, consider breaking the sentence down into units, each with its own adverb:

Last January he gave a lecture at the hospital; his subject was liver cancer

2.3 Writing Task: Build a Model

2.3.1 Building a model

You are now ready to begin to build a model of the Methodology by writing a short description of what the writer is doing in each sentence in the space provided below. Th e Key is on the next page. Once you have tried to produce your own model, you can use the Key to help you write this section of a research article when you eventually do it on your own.

GUIDELINES

You should spend 30–45 minutes on this task.If you can’t think of a good description of the fi rst sentence, choose an easier one, for example Sentence 4, and start with that. Remember that your model is only useful if it can be transferred to other Methodology sections, so don’t include content words such as groundwater or you won’t be able to use your model to generate Methodology sections in your fi eld.

One way to fi nd out what the writer is doing in a sentence — rather than what s/he is saying — is to imagine that your computer has accidentally deleted it. What is diff erent for you (as a reader) when it disappears? If you press another key on the computer and the sentence comes back, how does that aff ect the way you respond to the information?

Another way to fi gure out what the writer is doing in a sentence — rather than what s/he is saying — is to look at the grammar and vocabulary clues. What is the tense of the main verb? What is that tense normally used for? Is it the same tense as in the previous sentence? If not, why has the writer changed the tense? What words has the writer chosen to use?

Don’t expect to produce a perfect model. You will modify your model when you look at the Key, and perhaps again when you compare it to the way Methodology sections in your target articles work.



FA

Changes in the chemistry ofgroundwater in the chalk of the

London Basin

Methodology

1 Th e current investigation involved sampling and analysing six sites to measure changes in groundwater chemistry. 2 Th e sites were selected from the London Basin area, which is located in the south-east of England and has been frequently used to interpret groundwater evolution.2, 3, 4

3 A total of 18 samples was collected and then analysed for the isotopes mentioned earlier. 4 Samples 1–9 were collected in thoroughly-rinsed 25 ml brown glass bottles which were fi lled to the top and then sealed tightly to prevent contamination. 5 Th e fi lled bottles were shipped directly to two separate laboratories at Reading University, where they were analysed using standard methods suitably miniaturised to handle small quantities of water. 5

6 Samples 10–18 were prepared in our laboratory using a revised version of the precipitation method established by the ISF Institute in Germany.6 7 Th is method obtains a precipitate through the addition of BaCl2.2H2O; the resulting precipitate can be washed and stored easily.

In this sentence, the writer:

1___________________

2___________________

3___________________

4___________________

5___________________

6___________________

7___________________



FA

2.3.2 Key

8 Th e samples were subsequently shipped to ISF for analysis by accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS). 9 All tubing used was stainless steel, and although two samples were at risk of CFC contamination as a result of brief contact with plastic, variation among samples was negligible.

8__________________

9___________________

In Sentence 1 ‘Th e current investigation involved sampling and analysing six sites to measure changes in groundwater chemistry.’ the writer off ers a general overview of the entire subsection, including the purpose of the investigation.

If you wrote ‘introduction’ or ‘introduces the Methodology’ here, that won’t help you when you come to write your own thesis or research article because it doesn’t tell you what exactly to write in that sentence.

Why do I need to introduce the Methodology?

In some cases, writers begin immediately with a description of the procedure or the materials. Th is is appropriate where the research focus is very narrow and all those who are likely to read it are carrying out similar research. If this is not the case, it is more reader-friendly to start with some introductory material. Th e aim of providing a short introduction is to make the entry to that section smooth for the reader. Th ere are many ways to introduce the Methodology. Here are three of the most common ways:

• Off er a general overview by outlining the parameters of the work, for example the number of tests, the equipment /material/soft ware used and perhaps also the purpose of the investigation. Th is helps the reader to get a general idea of this section.

• Provide background information about the materials or about the source of the materials/equipment.

• Refer back to something in the previous section. Common options are restating the aim of the project or the problem you are hoping to address.



FA

If you start with a general overview or even a general paragraph about what was done and used, it can then be broken down to produce the details. However, if you begin with the details, you force the reader to put those details together to create a general picture of what you did and used. Th is is quite diffi cult for the reader to do and it is not his/her job; it is your job as a writer to arrange the information in an appropriate order so that it is easy for the reader to process it.

Furthermore, asking your reader to put details together to create a picture of what you did is risky, because each reader may create a slightly diff erent picture of the process if they begin ‘bottom-up’ with the details, rather than ‘top-down’ with a general overview. When you write using ‘top-down’ strategies you are in control. If you begin with general statements about what was done/used (In all cases, Most sites), you and your reader share the same framework, so when you fi ll in the details you are creating the same picture of what was done/used in the mind of each individual reader. Remember: show your reader the wall before you begin to examine the bricks.

In Sentence 2 ‘Th e sites were selected from the London Basin area, which is located in the south-east of England and has been frequently used to interpret groundwater evolution.2–4 the writer provides background information and justifi es the choice of location by referring to previous research.

Why do I need to justify or give reasons for what I did? Isn’t it obvious?

Your reasons may be obvious to you, but they are not always obvious to your readers. If you fail to provide justifi cation for what you did, then the reader may not accept the validity of your choices. Th ey may wonder why you did things in a particular way, or why you used a particular procedure. Th is has a negative eff ect: if you don’t explain why you did things then readers cannot be expected to accept your methodology, and this will eventually aff ect the way they evaluate your whole paper.

Many writers believe that this section is just an impersonal description of what was done or used; in fact there is a strong persuasive and communicative element. We see this not only in language such as thoroughly or with care but also in the frequency of justifi cation. In this



FA

description of your materials and methods, you need to communicate not only Th is is exactly what I did/used but also I had good reasons for those decisions. Justifi cation enables the reader to trust the choices you made.

Sometimes background information is given in the Present Simple to justify choices made. For example, you may have chosen a particular material because of its properties; if so, say what those properties are (Th is material is able to…). You may have chosen specifi c equipment or soft ware because of what it can do; if so, say what that is. In Sentence 2, we understand that the writer chose this geographical area because it had been previously validated as an appropriate location by other researchers.

In Sentence 3 ‘A total of 18 samples was collected and then analysed for the isotopes mentioned earlier’ the writer provides an overview of the procedure/method itself.

If I gave a general overview at the start of this subsection, why should I also give an overview of the procedure itself?

As you saw in Section 1.2.4, the beginning of a paragraph oft en signals the beginning of a new topic, and providing an introductory sentence is a reader-friendly technique. In addition, the overview in Sentence 3, like the one at the start of the subsection, enables the writer to move in a ‘top-down’ direction by creating a general framework into which the details can be easily slotted. Because the reader knows from the start how many samples were tested and what was done with them, both reader and writer share the same clear picture. Th ese sentences oft en start with phrases like Most of the tests or In all cases (see the vocabulary list in Section 2.4.2).

In Sentence 4 ‘Samples 1–9 were collected in thoroughly-rinsed 25 ml brown glass bottles which were fi lled to the top and then sealed tightly to prevent contamination.’ the writer provides details about what was done and used and also shows that care was taken.

How much detail do I need to provide?

If you’re not certain that all readers are familiar with the precise details of your methodology, it is better to give slightly too much information than



FA

too little. By the time you write up your research you will probably have repeated your experiments or simulations many times and so you are very familiar with the materials, quantities, equipment, soft ware, the sequence or steps in the procedure and the time taken for each step. Because of this familiarity, specifi c details (the size of the bottles in Sentence 5, for example) may seem obvious to you, but those details may not be obvious to every reader. If you want another researcher to be able to reproduce your work and obtain similar results, you should include every specifi cation and detail.

Note that in this sentence, the writer uses thoroughly, fi lled to the top and tightly to communicate to the reader that the work was carried out with care. Remember that your aim in writing the paper is not only to say what you did and found, but also to make sure that your reader accepts the conclusions at the end of your paper. In order to do this, the reader has to accept your results — but to accept your results s/he must fi rst accept your methodology. For this reason, it is important to present yourself as a competent researcher who carries out procedures accurately and with care.

Notice the use of 25 ml in Sentence 4. ml is the SI (Système International d’Unités) symbol for millilitre. Check the SI to make sure that you are using the correct symbol. Th ere is oft en a space between the quantity/number and the SI symbol; in addition, although SI symbols look like abbreviations they are not, and therefore should not be followed by a period.

In Sentence 5 ‘The filled bottles were shipped directly to two separate laboratories at Reading University, where they were analysed using standard methods suitably miniaturised to handle small quantities of water.5’ the writer continues to describe what was done in detail, using language which communicates that care was taken.

Can you see which words in Sentence 5 communicate to the reader that care was taken? Th e writer could just have written Th e fi lled bottles were shipped to two laboratories and analysed using standard methods miniaturised to handle small quantities of water, but including words like directly, separate and suitably communicates reliability.



FA

In Sentence 6 ‘Samples 10–18 were prepared in our laboratory using a revised version of the precipitation method established by the ISF Institute in Germany.6’ the writer describes what was done by referring to existing methods in the literature.

Why should I refer to other research; why not just describe the method I used?

One reason is that it is unlikely that you created the entire method you used all by yourself. In many cases part of it will be taken from a method used or discovered by someone else and their method may be very well known, so if you give the research reference you do not need to give every detail. Giving the research reference, therefore, provides you with a shortcut. You will fi nd vocabulary for this in Option 1 in Section 2.4.

But if the reference is available in the literature, why does the writer need to give any details? Why can’t readers just go to the library, fi nd the reference and read it themselves?

In this case, the writer provides basic details of the method because some readers may not be familiar with it and it is not always appropriate to send readers to the library or Internet to look up a reference. It’s a matter of professional courtesy for writers to describe the procedures, tests, equipment or materials they used even when they are used in a way that is identical to the reference. Remember to use the Present Simple for this kind of background information (Th is method obtains) and to switch back to the Past Simple when you return to describing what you did.

Comparisons between your materials and methods and those of other researchers in the same fi eld are a legitimate topic for the Methodology section. It is common to keep previous or current research procedures clearly in your readers’ view so that they can see how your work is diff erent from other work in the area. Either your method is identical to others you mention (Option 1 in the vocabulary list in Section 2.4), or it is similar (Option 2 in the vocabulary list), or it is signifi cantly diff erent, in which case the diff erences between your materials/method and those of other researchers in the same fi eld may even represent the actual contribution of your paper/thesis itself (Option 3).



FA

When you refer to the work of other researchers, be careful about the location of your reference notation in the sentence; you may accidentally credit someone with work they have not done — perhaps even with your own work! Remember that reference notations do not automatically go at the end of a sentence.

It is sometimes appropriate or necessary to mention the eff ects of the procedures you used. However, it is not a good idea to discuss them or comment at this stage. If you go into too much detail you may leave yourself with nothing to write about in the Results section. Interestingly, it is common to provide further details about the methodology in the Results section. Sometimes the Methodology section just provides basic parameters and the method itself is detailed in the Results section in relation to the results obtained.

In Sentence 7 ‘Th is method obtains a precipitate through the addition of BaCl2.2H2O; the resulting precipitate can be washed and stored easily.’ the writer provides more detailed information about the method and shows it to have been a good choice.

Justifi cation is common throughout this section; as before, the aims are to answer possible criticisms or doubts about your choices, to assure the reader that your choices were made on the basis of good reasons and to give those reasons. We oft en see justifi cation of signifi cant choices and the reason for rejecting alternative options given in full. As mentioned earlier, this is because it is essential that your reader accepts the decisions you made about your methodology.

In Sentence 8 ‘Th e samples were subsequently shipped to ISF for analysis by accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS).’ the writer provides more details of the method.

It is interesting to note that, as mentioned earlier, you need to do more than just provide details of what you did and used; this is the only sentence in this section that gives details and nothing more — every other sentence has an additional function.



FA

In Sentence 9 ‘All tubing used was stainless steel, and although two samples were at risk of CFC contamination as a result of brief contact with plastic, variation among samples was negligible.’ the writer mentions a possible diffi culty in the methodology.

Doesn’t this discuss a result of what was done?

No, it’s actually saying that the problems in the methodology didn’t aff ect the results. Sometimes you do need to mention results in this section, but only if the preliminary results were used to modify or develop the design of the main experiments/simulations.

Why should I mention problems in the methodology? Won’t it make me look bad?

In fact the opposite is true. In the fi rst place, if you don’t mention the imperfections in your work, it may look as though you are not aware of them, which gives a very poor impression. So you look far more professional if you do mention them. If you ignore or try to hide imperfections (such as a data set which was too small, equipment or soft ware that was not ideal) and your readers notice them, they will begin to doubt your legitimacy as a researcher, which aff ects their acceptance of your results and conclusions.

Second, whenever you fi nish a piece of research, there is a good chance that you have learned enough from the problems encountered during the project to do it better next time. Should you delay writing it up while you repeat the work and improve your technique? What if you learn more this time too; should you delay again while you do it again? And again? If you do, you may never actually write it up. An acceptable option is to write up the research and acknowledge the problems or diffi culties you encountered. In fact, it’s not only considered acceptable to mention them in this section, it’s much better to do it here rather than wait until the end. It isn’t considered appropriate to mention limitations or imperfections for the fi rst time when you are discussing suggestions for future work in the Discussion/Conclusion.

But how can I talk about problems in my work without looking like a failure?

Use vocabulary that minimises the problem, minimises your responsibility, maximises the good aspects and suggests a solution. In



FA

the example above, the writer has acknowledged that there was a problem and then minimised its eff ects (variation among samples was negligible). Th is is a standard way of dealing with the need to talk about problems. You can fi nd examples of the language needed to refer to problems and diffi culties in a conventional, professional way in the vocabulary list in Section 2.4.

2.3.3 Th e model

Here are the sentence descriptions we have collected: In Sentence 1 the writer off ers a general overview of the subsection.In Sentence 2 the writer provides background information and

justifi cation.In Sentence 3 the writer provides an overview of the procedure/

method itself.In Sentence 4 the writer provides details about what was done and

used and shows that care was taken.In Sentence 5 the writer continues to describe what was done in detail,

using language which communicates that care was taken.

In Sentence 6 the writer describes what was done by referring to existing methods in the literature.

In Sentence 7 the writer provides more detailed information about the method and shows it to have been a good choice.

In Sentence 8 the writer provides more details of the method.In Sentence 9 the writer mentions a possible diffi culty in the

methodology.

We can streamline these so that our model has FOUR basic components. Unlike the Introduction model, in which all the items of each component are likely to be used, this is a ‘menu’ from which you select items appropriate to your research topic and the journal you are submitting to. If you constructed the equipment yourself you won’t need to ‘give the source of ’ the equipment used in component 1. If there were no problems, you won’t need the fourth component at all.



FA

2.3.4 Testing the model

Th e next step is to look at the way this model works in a real Materials/Methods section (remember it may not be called Materials and Methods) and in the target articles you have selected. Here are some full-length Methodology sections from real research articles. Read them through, and mark the model components (1, 2, 3 or 4) wherever you think you see them. For example, if you think the fi rst sentence corresponds to number 1 in the model, write 1 next to it, etc.

Eff ects of H2O on structure of acid-catalysed SiO2sol-gel fi lms

Experimental procedure

Equal volumes of tetraethylorthosilicate (TEOS) and ethanol were mixed and stirred vigorously for 10 min at room temperature.

1 PROVIDE A GENERAL INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW OF THE MATERIALS/METHODS

RESTATE THE PURPOSE OF THE WORK

GIVE THE SOURCE OF MATERIALS/EQUIPMENT USED

SUPPLY ESSENTIAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION

2 PROVIDE SPECIFIC AND PRECISE DETAILS ABOUT MATERIALS AND METHODS (i.e. quantities, temperatures, duration, sequence, conditions, locations, sizes)

JUSTIFY CHOICES MADE

INDICATE THAT APPROPRIATE CARE WAS TAKEN

3 RELATE MATERIALS/METHODS TO OTHER STUDIES

4 INDICATE WHERE PROBLEMS OCCURRED



FA

Th en 0.1 M HCl was gradually added to the solutions, until a water to TEOS molar ratio of R = 2 was attained. Additional deionised water was added to give solutions with R = 3, 4 and 5, so that for all solutions the molecular ration TEOS:HCl was maintained, as summarised in Table 1. Th e solutions were placed in the refl uxing bath immediately aft er mixing, and the temperature of the bath was increased to 70°C in 15 min, while stirring, and kept there for 2 h. Th e solutions were then aged for 24 h at room temperature, before being diluted with an equal volume of EtOH and stirred for 10 min, to give the solution used for spin coating. All the chemicals were obtained from Aldrich Chemicals Ltd.

Th e sols were dispensed on p-type, 75 mm diameter silicon wafers, through a 0.1 µm fi lter (PTFE Whatman, obtained from BDH Merk Ltd), and thereaft er the substrate was spun at 2000 rpm for 15 s. Th e coated substrate was baked at 100°C for 5 min, and then cleaved into 10 pieces. Each piece was baked in air at a diff erent temperature, in the range from 100 to 1000°C, for 30 min. Th e samples were kept in covered petri dishes for a few days in room conditions before the experiments were continued; this allows the completion of surface hydroxylation, and gave reproducible ellipsometer results when water is used as an adsorbate.

Th e thickness and refractive index of the samples were measured using a Rudolph AutoEl III ellipsometer, with an operating wavelength of 633 nm, and precisions of about ±0.002 and ±3 Å in index and thickness, respectively. For microporous fi lms, the measured index is strongly dependent on relative humidity, because of condensation of water in the pores. By mea-suring the dependence of index on humidity, information about porosity can be obtained. We have extended this technique to the use of diff erent adsorbate species, in order to probe pore sizes [3]; this, for the sake of brevity, we call molecular probe ellipsometry. In this technique, the fi lm is placed in a sealed chamber on the sample stage of the ellipsometer; fi rst dry N2 gas is passed through the chamber to empty the pores of any condensed adsorbate, and then N2 having been bubbled through the liquid adsorbate is passed over the sample to fi ll the pores; in each case the refractive index is measured. By assuming that all the accessible pores in



FA

dry and saturated atmospheres are completely empty or fi lled with adsorbate, respectively, the pore volume and index of the solid skeleton can be determined by an extension of the Lorentz-Lorenz relation [8] where nf , ns and np are the refractive indices of the fi lm, solid skeleton and pores, respectively, and vp is the volume fraction porosity. Measurement of nf for both the dry and satu-rated fi lms allows both vp and ns to be determined with the as-sumption that np has the same value as that of the bulk adsorbate in the saturated case, and of air (np = 1) in the dry case.

In order to empty the pores, an initial high fl ow rate of N2 was used for a few minutes and the rate was then reduced to 1000 sccm (standard c.c per minute) for 15 min. the fl ow rate was kept at 100 sccm for 15 min to fi ll the pores. Th e low fl ow rate in this case reduces the likelihood of cooling of the sample surface, which could cause condensation on the external fi lm surface. Comparison of the measured fi lm thickness for wet and dry atmospheres indicated that this did not occur. Th e temperature inside the chamber was monitored by a thermocouple to ensure that there was no drift or alteration due to gas fl ow. In each case, the measurement was recorded once repeatable readings were obtained. Th e adsorbates used are listed in Table 2. Th eir average diameters were estimated using a combination of bond length data [9] and Van der Waals atomic radii [10]. All were obtained from Aldrich Chemical Ltd, except C24H44O8 obtained from Fluka Chemie AG.

Th e optical quality of the fi lms was fi rst studied qualitatively by visual examination, and by optical microscopy. Th e homogeneity of the fi lms was then investigated quantitatively by measuring the intensity of scattered light resulting from oblique refl ection of a laser beam from the fi lm-coated silicon substrate. A helium-neon laser beam, having a wavelength of 633 nm, was directed onto the sample, through a chopping wheel, at an angle 59° from the normal. Th e specularly refl ected beam was absorbed onto a black card, and the scattered light was collected at normal incidence to the sample using a ×10 microscope objective, and measured using a silicon photodiode and a lock-in amplifi er. Th e position of lens and angle of incidence were fi xed during measurements.



FA

Th e fi lm stress, σf , can be determined by measuring the resulting substrate curvature [11], according to Stoney’s formula:

σf = (Est2s/6(1 − vs)tf)(1/rs − 1/rf), (2)

where rs and rf are the radii of curvature of the bare substrate and substrate with fi lm, respectively; Es, ts and vs are the Young’s modulus, thickness and Poisson’s ratio of the silicon substrate, respectively, and tf is the thickness of the fi lm. Tensile stresses are positive and compressive stresses negative; thus, a positive radius of curvature denotes a convex fi lm surface. Entire 75 mm diameter wafers were used, and curvature was measured from plots of surface profi le along 30 mm lines over the central part of the fi lm surface using a Dektak IIA auto-levelling profi lometer. To reduce inaccuracy caused by lack of axial symmetry in the wafer curvature, two scans were made, in orthogonal directions, for each measurement, and the inverse radii thus obtained were averaged. Care was taken not to use wafers which had a substantially asymmetric curvature before deposition. Wafer thicknesses, measured with a micrometer, were 390 ± 3 µm. Final fi lm thicknesses were measured by ellipsometry and checked by patterned etching and profi lometry, and interim thicknesses were estimated by interpolation. Equivalent single-layer thickness measurements indicate that the assumption that fi nal thickness is proportional to number of layers is suffi ciently accurate. For Es/(1 − vs), the value 180 GPa was used [11].

In order to give an indication of the eff ect of water content on stress, 10 layers were deposited for each R value, using 10 s rapid thermal annealing at 1000°C in all cases.

Infrared imaging of defects heated by a sonic pulse

ii) Experiment

Our experimental setup is shown in Fig. 1. Th e source of the sonic excitation is a Branson, Model 900 MA 20 kHz ultrasonic welding generator, with a Model GK-5 hand-held gun. Th e source has a maximum power of 1 kW, and is triggered to provide a



FA

short (typically 50–200 ms duration) output pulse to the gun. Th e gun contains a piezoelectric transducer that couples to the specimen through the 1.3-cm-diam tip of a steel horn. In the laboratory setup, as can be seen in Fig. 1, we use a mechanical fi xture to hold the sonic horn fi rmly against the sample surface. Th is setup uses a machine slide to provide reproducible alignment of the horn. Typically, a piece of soft Cu sheet is placed between the tip of the horn and the specimen to provide good sound transmission. Th e location of the source on the sample is chosen primarily for convenience of geometrical alignment, and since it has minimal eff ect on the resulting sonic IR images, typically is not changed during the course of the inspection. Sound waves at frequencies of 20 kHz in metals such as aluminium or steel have wavelengths on the order of tens of centimetres, and propagate with appreciable amplitude over distances much longer than a wavelength. For typical complex-shaped industrial parts (see, for example, the aluminium automotive part shown in Fig. 1), refl ections from various boundaries of the specimen introduce countless conversions among the vibrational modes, leading to a very complicated pattern of sound within the specimen during the time that the pulse is applied. Since the speed of sound in solids is typically on the order of a few km/s, this sound fi eld completely insonifi es the regions under inspection during the time that the excitation pulse is applied. If a subsurface interface is present, say a fatigue crack in a metal, or a delamination in a composite structure, the opposing surfaces at the interface will be caused to move by the various sound modes present there. Th e complexity of the sound is such that relative motion of these surfaces will ordinarily have components both in the plane of the crack and normal to it. Th us, the surfaces will ‘rub’ and ‘slap’ against one another, with a concomitant local dissipation of mechanical energy. Th is energy dissipation causes a temperature rise, which propagates in the material through thermal diff usion. We monitor this dissipation through its eff ect on the surface temperature distribution. Th e resolution of the resulting images depends on the depth of the dissipative source as well as on the time at which the imaging is carried out.



FA

Th e IR camera that we used in the setup that is shown in Fig. 1 is a Raytheon Radiance HS that contains a 256×256 InSb focal plane array, and operates in the 3–5 µm spectral region. It is sensitive (with a 1 ms integration time) to surface temperature changes of ~0.03°C, and can be operated at full frame rates up to 140 Hz with that sensitivity. We have also observed the eff ects reported here with a considerably less expensive, uncooled, microbolometer focal plane array camera, operating in the long wavelength (7–10 µm) of the IR.

Th e height of biomolecules measured with the atomic force microscope depends on electrostatic interactions

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Biological samplesAquaporin-1 (AQP1) from human erythrocyte solubilized in octyl-f3-glucopyranoside was reconstituted in the presence of Escherichia coli phospholipids to form two-dimensional (2D) crystalline sheets (Walz et al., 1994). Th e 2D crystals were prepared at a concentration of -0.5 mg protein/ml and 0.25 mg/ml lipid in 0.25 M NaCl, 20 mM MgCl2, 20 mM 2-(N-morpholino)ethanesulfonic acid (MES) (pH 6).

Hexagonally packed intermediate (HPI) layer from Deinococcus radiodurans, a kind gift of Dr. W. Baumeister, was extracted from whole cells (strain SARK) with lithium dodecyl sulfate, and purifi ed on a Percoll density gradient (Baumeister et al., 1982). A stock solution (1 mg/ml protein) was stored in distilled water at 4°C.

Purple membranes of Halobacterium salinarium strain ET1001 were isolated as described by Oesterhelt and Stoeckenius (1974). Th e membranes were frozen and stored at −70°C. Aft er thawing, stock solutions (10 mg protein/ml) were kept in distilled water at 4°C.

Porin OmpF trimers from E. coli strain BZ 1 10/PMY222 (Hoenger et al., 1993) solubilized in octyl-polyoxyethylene were mixed with solubilised dimyristoyl phosphatidylcholine (99% purity;



FA

Sigma Chemical Co., St. Louis, MO) at a lipid-to-protein ratio (w/w) of 0.2 and a protein concentration of 1 mg/ml. Th e mixture was reconstituted as previously described (Hoenger et al., 1993) in a temperature-controlled dialysis device (Jap et al., 1992). Th e dialysis buff er was 20 mM HEPES, pH 7.4, 100 mM NaCl, 20 mM MgCl2, 0.2 mM dithiothreitol, 3 mM azide.

1,2-Dipalmitoyl-phosphatidylethanolamine (DPPE) from Sigma was solubilized in chloroform:hexane (1:1) to a concentration of 1 mg/ml. Th e resulting solution was diluted in buff er solution (150 mM KCl, 10 mM Tris, pH 8.4) to a concentration of 100 µg/ml.

Layered crystalsMoTe2, a layered crystal of the family of transition metal dichalcogenides (Wilson and Yoff e, 1969), was employed to calibrate the piezo scanner of the AFM. It was prepared by chemical vapor transport (CVT), with chlorine or bromine as carrier gases in a temperature gradient of 100°C across the quartz ampule (Jungblut et al., 1992), and was a kind gift of Y. Tomm.

Muscovite mica (Mica New York Corp., New York) was used as the solid support for all samples. Mica minerals are characterized by their layered crystal structure, and show a perfect basal cleavage that provides atomically fl at surfaces over several hundreds of square microns. Th eir hydrophilicity and relative chemical inertness (Bailey, 1984) make them suitable for the adsorption of biological macromolecules.

Atomic force microscopyA commercial AFM (Nanoscope III; Digital Instruments, Santa Barbara, CA), equipped with a 120-µm scanner (j-scanner) and a liquid cell, was used. Before use, the liquid cell was cleaned with normal dish cleaner, gently rinsed with ultrapure water, sonicated in ethanol (50 kHz), and sonicated in ultrapure water (50 kHz). Mica was punched to a diameter of −5 mm and glued with water-insoluble epoxy glue (Araldit; Ciba Geigy AG, Basel, Switzerland) onto a Tefl on disc. Its diameter of 25 mm was slightly larger than the diameter of the supporting steel disc. Th e steel disc was required to magnetically mount the sample on to the piezoelectric scanner.



FA

Imaging was performed in the error signal mode, acquiring the defl ection and height signal simultaneously. Th e defl ection signal was minimized by optimizing gains and scan speed. Th e height images presented were recorded in the contact mode. Th e scan speed was roughly linear to the scan size, at 4–8 lines/s for lower magnifi cations (frame size 1–25 µm). Th e applied force was corrected manually to compensate for thermal drift . To achieve reproducible forces, cantilevers were selected from a restricted area of one wafer. Th e dimensions of one tip were measured in a scanning electron microscope to calculate the mechanical properties of the cantilever (Butt et al., 1993). Th e 120-µm-long cantilevers purchased from Olympus Ltd. (Tokyo, Japan) had a force constant of k = 0.1 N/m, and the 200-µm-long cantilevers purchased from Digital Instruments had a force constant of 0.15 N/m. All cantilevers used had oxide-sharpened Si3N4 tips.

Sample preparationTo minimize contamination of surfaces during exposure to ambient air, sample supports were prepared immediately before use. All buff ers were made with ultrapure water (−18 MDcm−1; Branstead, Boston, MA). Th is water contains fewer hydrocarbons than conventional bidistilled water and fewer macroscopic contaminants, both of which can infl uence the imaging process. Chemicals were grade p.a. and purchased from Sigma Chemie AG (Buchs, Switzerland). Th e buff ers used were Tris-(hydroxymethyl)-aminomethane (from pH 10.2 to pH 7.2), MES (from pH 6.5 to pH 5.5), and citric acid (from pH 5.4 to pH 3.0). Macromolecular samples were checked before use by conventional negative stain electron microscopy (Bremer et al., 1992) and/or by sodium dodecyl sulfate-gel electrophoresis.

Th e samples were diluted to a concentration of 5–10 µg/ml in buff er solution (pH 8.2, 20 mM Tris-HCl, 2100 mM; monovalent electrolyte; except for DPPE, which was not further diluted) before adsorption to freshly cleaved mica. Aft er an adsorption time of 10–60 min, the samples were gently washed with the measuring buff er to remove weakly attached membranes. Th is allowed height measurements at low electrolyte concentrations, at which


Methodology — Vocabulary 75

FA

samples adsorb sparsely to mica (Muller et al., 1997a and 1997b). Experiments requiring constant pH were performed at pH 8.2. Th e isoelectric points of bacteriorhodopsin, AQP1, DPPE, and OmpF are 5.2 (Ross et al., 1989), 6.95 (calculated), −10 (Tatulian, 1993), and 4.64 (calculated), respectively. Th us, at this pH, all samples had a net negative charge, except for DPPE, which had a net positive charge.

Now do the same in your target articles. We hope you obtain good confi rmation of the model and can now answer the questions in Section 2.1:

• How do I start this section? What type of sentence should I begin with?

• What type of information should be in this section, and in what order?• How do I end this section?

2.4 Vocabulary

In order to complete the information you need to write this section of your paper you now need to fi nd appropriate vocabulary for each part of the model. Th e vocabulary in this section is taken from over 600 research articles in diff erent fi elds, all of which were written by native speakers and published in science journals. Only words/phrases which appear frequently have been included; this means that the vocabulary lists contain words and phrases which are considered normal and acceptable by both writers and editors.

In the next section we will look at vocabulary for the following seven areas of the model:

1. PROVIDE A GENERAL INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW OF THE MATERIALS/METHODS and GIVE THE SOURCE OF MATERIALS/EQUIPMENT USED Th is includes phrases such as In this study, most of the samples were tested using a… as well as verbs such as were supplied by. A good list of commonly-used words and expressions will encourage you to include this in your fi rst sentences.



FA

2. SUPPLY ESSENTIAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION Th is list provides words and phrases used to describe instruments, equipment or locations, and includes items such as parallel to and equidistant. Th ey are essential because the reader needs them in order to visualise or recreate your work.

3. PROVIDE SPECIFIC AND PRECISE DETAILS ABOUT MATERIALS AND METHODS (i.e. quantities, temperatures, duration, sequence, conditions, locations, sizes) Th is includes verbs which specifi cally describe what you did/used. Instead of writing only was done or was used, a more specifi c verb such as optimise or extract can save you time by explaining exactly what was ‘done’.

4. JUSTIFY CHOICES MADE Th is includes phrases that introduce the reasons for the choices you made, such as in order to. It also includes a list of verbs that specify the advantages of the choices you made, like enable and facilitate.

5. INDICATE THAT APPROPRIATE CARE WAS TAKEN Th is includes adjectives (careful) as well as adverbs (carefully), so as to give you maximum fl exibility when you are constructing sentences.

6. RELATE MATERIALS/METHODS TO OTHER STUDIESTh is provides you with ways to distinguish between procedures/materials/tests which were exactly the same as those used by other researchers, procedures/materials/tests which were similar to those used by other researchers and procedures/materials/tests which were signifi cantly diff erent.

7. INDICATE WHERE PROBLEMS OCCURRED Th is list includes ways of minimising the problem, minimising your responsibility, maximising the good aspects and suggesting a solution to the problem.

2.4.1 Vocabulary task

Look through the Methodology sections in this unit and the Methodology or Experimental sections in your target articles. Underline or highlight all



FA

the words and phrases that you think could be used in the seven areas above.

A full list of useful language can be found on the next pages. Th is includes all the appropriate words and phrases you highlighted along with some other common ones. Read through them and check the meaning of any you don’t know in the dictionary. Th is list will be useful for many years.

2.4.2 Vocabulary for the Methodology section

1. PROVIDE A GENERAL INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW OF THE MATERIALS/METHODS and GIVE THE SOURCE OF MATERIALS/EQUIPMENT USED

Some of the vocabulary you need for this is in the Introduction vocabulary list; for example, many of the verbs that describe what you did/used can be found there.

Th ese verbs fall into three categories: the fi rst includes general verbs related to academic research, such as attempt, consider, conduct, determine, investigate, report, suggest, verify, and most of these can be found in the Introduction vocabulary list. Th e second category contains verbs that specify what you did, such as calculate, extract, isolate, formulate, incorporate, modify, plot, simulate, and these can be found in the vocabulary list below. Th e third category includes verbs which are specifi c to your fi eld and your research, but which are not useful in other fi elds, for example clone, dissect, isotype, infuse. Also try:

all (of)both (of)each (of)many (of)most (of)the majority(of)

(the) tests(the) samples(the) trials(the) experiments(the) equipment(the) chemicals(the) models(the) instruments(the) materials

is/are commercially availablewas/were acquired (from/by)was/were carried outwas/were chosenwas/were conductedwas/were collectedwas/were devisedwas/were found inwas/were generated (by)was/were modifi edwas/were obtained (from/by)



FA

Here are some examples of how these are used:

• Th e impact tests used in this work were a modifi ed version of…• All reactions were performed in a 27 ml glass reactor…• All cell lines were generated as previously described in…• In the majority of the tests, buff ers with a pH of 8 were used in order

to…• Both experiments were performed in a greenhouse so that…• Th e substrate was obtained from the Mushroom Research Centre…• SSCE glass structures were used in this study to perform…• Th e cylindrical lens was obtained from Newport USA and is shown in

Fig. 3.• Th e material investigated was a standard aluminium alloy; all melts

were modifi ed with sodium.• Topographical examination was carried out using a 3-D stylus

instrument.• Th e experiments were conducted at a temperature of 0.5ºC.

2. SUPPLY ESSENTIAL BACKGROUND INFORMATION As well as describing standard procedures and techniques you may need to describe the equipment/apparatus or instrument you used or constructed. In order to do this accurately you need good control over the language of spatial location. Make sure you know how to use the words/phrases below. If you are not sure, write down the dictionary defi nition and use a concordance sampler (which you can fi nd on the Internet) to see how they are used.

was/were performed (by/in)was/were provided (by)was/were purchased (from)was/were supplied (by) was/were used as suppliedwas/were investigated



FA


• Porosity was measured at the near end and at the far end of the polished surface.

• Th e compression axis is aligned with the rolling direction…• Th e source light was polarised horizontally and the sample beam can

be scanned laterally.• Th e mirrors are positioned near the focal plane.• Electrodes comprised a 4 mm diam disk of substrate material embedded

in a Tefl on disk of 15 mm diam.

oppositeout of range (of)belowaboveparallel (to/with)on the right/left (to) bisectnear side/endsidedownstream (of)boundaryon the front/backhigher/lowerhorizontalcircularequidistant on either sideis placedis mounted (on)is aligned (with)extendsis attached to

facingwithin range (of)underoverperpendicular (to)to the right/left (to) convergefar side/endedgeupstream (of) marginat the front/backupper/lowerverticalrectangularequally spacedon both sidesis situatedis coupled (onto)is connected (to)is surrounded (by)is covered with/by

underneathon top (of)adjacent (to)

(to) intersect

tip

borderin the front/backinner/outerlateralconical

on each sideis locatedis fastened (to)is fi xed (to) is fi tted (with)is joined (to)

end

in front (of)

occupiesis positionedis embedded is encased (in)



FA

• Th e intercooler was mounted on top of the engine…• Th e concentration of barium decreases towards the edge…• Similar loads were applied to the front and side of the box…• A laminar fl ow element was located downstream of the test section of

the wind tunnel…

In which sentence(s) below was the table closest to the wall?

Th e table was placed against the wall. Th e table was placed next to the wall. Th e table was placed fl ush with the wall. Th e table was placed in contact with the wall. Th e table was placed right against the wall. Th e table was placed alongside the wall.

In which sentence(s) below was the clock closest to the door?

Th e clock was located just above the door. Th e clock was located slightly above the door. Th e clock was located immediately above the door. Th e clock was located directly above the door. Th e clock was located right above the door.

Note that half as wide (as) = half the width (of); half as heavy (as) = half the weight (of); twice as long (as) = twice the length (of) and twice as strong (as) = twice the strength (of). Also note that with/having a weight of 20 kg = weighing 20 kg and with/having a width/length of 20 cm = 20 cm wide/long.

3. PROVIDE SPECIFIC AND PRECISE DETAILS ABOUT MATERIALS AND METHODS Th ese verbs fall into three categories: the fi rst includes general verbs used in academic research, such as attempt, consider, conduct, determine, investigate, report, suggest, verify, and these can be found in the Introduction vocabulary list (Section 1.4). Th e second category contains technical verbs which are specifi c to your fi eld and your research, but which are not useful



FA

in other fi elds, for example anneal, calibrate, centrifuge, dissect, fertilise, ionise, infuse. Th ese will not be given here because they are not generally useful. Th e third category is a set of less technical verbs that specify what was done or used, such as calculate, extract, isolate, formulate, incorporate, modify, plot, simulate. Th ese usually occur in the passive (was/were isolated) and can be found in the vocabulary list below.

was adaptedwas addedwas adoptedwas adjustedwas appliedwas arrangedwas assembledwas assumedwas attachedwas calculated was calibratedwas carried outwas characterisedwas collectedwas combinedwas computedwas consolidatedwas constructedwas controlledwas convertedwas createdwas designedwas derivedwas discardedwas distributed

was dividedwas eliminated was employedwas estimatedwas exposed was extractedwas fi lteredwas formulatedwas generatedwas immersed was inhibited was incorporated was includedwas inserted was installedwas invertedwas isolated was locatedwas maintainedwas maximisedwas measuredwas minimised was modifi edwas normalisedwas obtained

was operatedwas optimisedwas plottedwas positionedwas preparedwas quantifi edwas recordedwas regulatedwas removedwas repeatedwas restrictedwas retainedwas sampledwas scoredwas selectedwas separatedwas simulatedwas stabilisedwas substitutedwas trackedwas transferred was treatedwas variedwas utilised



FA

4. JUSTIFY CHOICES MADE

because*by doing…, we were able tochosen for (+ noun)chosen to (+ infi nitive)for the purpose of (+ -ing or noun)**for the sake of (+ -ing or noun)in an attempt to (+ infi nitive)in order to (+ infi nitive)it was possible to (+ infi nitive)off er a means of (+ -ing)one way to avoid... our aim was to (+ infi nitive)

provide a way of (+ -ing)selected on the basis of…so as to (+ infi nitive)so/such thatso (+ -ing )thereby (+ -ing )therefore*thus (+ -ing)to (+ infi nitive)to take advantage ofwhich/this allows/allowed etc.with the intention of (+ -ing)

*See Section 1.2.2 for other examples of signalling language**See box below for infi nitives, -ing forms and noun forms of useful verbs. ∅ indicates that a noun form is not available or is not common in this type of structure

INFINITIVEachieveallowassess avoidcompensate forconfi rmdetermineenableenhanceensure establishfacilitate

-ING FORMachievingallowingassessingavoidingcompensating forconfi rmingdeterminingenablingenhancingensuringestablishingfacilitating

NOUN FORMachievement∅assessmentavoidancecompensation forconfi rmationdetermination∅enhancement∅establishmentfacilitation



FA


• To validate the results from the metroscale model, samples were collected from all groups.

• Th e method of false nearest neighbours was selected in order to determine the embedding dimension.

• For the sake of simplicity, only a single value was analysed.• By partitioning the array, all the multipaths could be identifi ed.• Zinc oxide was drawn into the laminate with the intention of enhancing

delaminations and cracks.• Th e advantage of using three-dimensional analysis was that the out-of-

plane stress fi eld could be obtained.• Because FITC was used for both probes, enumeration was carried out

using two diff erent slides.• Th e LVDTs were unrestrained, so allowing the sample to move freely.• Th e cylinder was constructed from steel, which avoided problems of

water absorption.

guarantee identifyimproveincludeincreaselimitminimiseobtainovercomepermitpreventprovidereduceremovevalidate

guaranteeingidentifyingimprovingincludingincreasinglimitingminimisingobtainingovercomingpermittingpreventingprovidingreducingremovingvalidating

guaranteeidentifi cationimprovementinclusionincreaselimitation∅∅∅∅preventionprovisionreductionremovalvalidation



FA

5. INDICATE THAT APPROPRIATE CARE WAS TAKEN Most of the items in the box below are in adverb form, but they also occur in adjective form (e.g. accurate).

accuratelyalwaysappropriatelyat leastboth/allcarefullycompletely constantlycorrectly directly

every/eachexactlyentirelyfi rmlyfrequentlyfreshlyfullygentlygoodidentical

immediatelyindependently individuallyneveronlypreciselyrandomlyrapidlyreliablyrepeatedly

rigorouslyseparatelysmoothlysuccessfullysuitablytightlythoroughlyuniformlyvigorouslywell


• A mechanical fi xture was employed to hold the sonic horn fi rmly in place.

• Aft er being removed, the mouse lungs were frozen and thawed at least three times.

• Th e specimen was monitored constantly for a period af 24 hours.• Th ey were then placed on ice for immediate FACS analysis.• Frequent transducer readings were taken to update the stress conditions

smoothly.• Th e samples were slowly and carefully sheared to failure.

6. RELATE MATERIALS/METHODS TO OTHER STUDIES Th ere are three ways in which you might want to relate your materials/methods to those used in other studies.

Option 1: Th e procedure/material you used is exactly the same as the one you cite.



FA

Option 3: Th e procedure/material you used is signifi cantly diff erent from the one you cite.

*by and of are usually followed by the name of the researcher or research team (by Ross or using the method of Ross et al.) and in is usually followed by the work (in Ross et al. (2003)). Another option is simply to give the research reference at the appropriate place in the sentence, either in brackets or using a superscript number.

Option 2: Th e procedure/material you used is similar to the one you cite.

according toas described by/in*as explained by/inas inas proposed by/in

as reported by/in as reported previouslyas suggested by/incan be found indetails are given in

given by/inidentical to in accordance withthe same as that of/inusing the method of/in

a (modifi ed) version ofadapted frombased in part/partly onbased onessentially identical in line within principlein essencemore or less identical slightly modifi ed

(very) similar almost the same essentially the samelargely the same practically the same virtually the samewith some adjustmentswith some alterationswith some changeswith some modifi cations

(to) adapt(to) adjust(to) alter(to) change(to) modify(to) refi ne(to) revise(to) vary

a novel step was…adapted from*based on*in line with

although in many ways similar although in some ways similar although in essence similar

(to) adapt*(to) adjust*(to) alter*(to) change*



FA

*as you can see, these can be used in Option 2 as well as Option 3. When you use them in Option 2 you may not need to state the diff erences between the procedure/material you used and the one you cite if they are not signifi cant. In Option 3 those diff erences or modifi cations are signifi cant and you should say what they were, especially if they were modifi cations which improved the procedure/material.


• Developmental evaluation was carried out using the Bayley Scales of Infant Development (Bayley, 1969).

• Th e size of the Gaussians was adjusted as in (Krissian et al., 2000).• Th e centrifuge is a slightly modifi ed commercially available model, the

Beckman J6-HC.• Th e protein was overexpressed and purifi ed as reported

previously.10,12

• A revised version of the Structured Clinical Interview (4th edition)6 was used.

• We modifi ed the Du and Parker fi lter to address these shortcomings and we refer to this modifi ed fi lter as the MaxCurve fi lter.

• In our implementation we followed Sato et al. (1998) by using a discrete kernel size.

7. INDICATE WHERE PROBLEMS OCCURRED

loosely based onpartially based onpartly based on*

with the followingmodifi cations/changes:

(to) refi ne*(to) revise(to) vary*(to) modify*

minimise problem

did not align preciselyonly approximate

minimise responsibility

limited byinevitably

maximise good aspects

acceptablefairly well



FA

*Th ere is an interesting diff erence between the phrase future work should and the phrase future work will. When you write future work should you are suggesting a direction for future work and inviting the research community in your fi eld to take up the challenge and produce the research. When you write future work will you are communicating your own plans and intentions to the research community and it should be understood that these plans and intentions belong to you — you’re saying ‘hands off !’ to the rest of the research community and describing a research plan of your own


• Inevitably, considerable computation was involved.• Only a brief observation was feasible, however, given the number in the

sample.• Although centrifugation could not remove all the excess solid drug, the

amount remaining was negligible.• Solutions using (q = 1) diff ered slightly from the analytical solutions.• Continuing research will examine a string of dc-dc converters to

determine if the predicted effi ciencies can be achieved in practice.• While the anode layer was slightly thicker than 13 μm, this was a minor

defi cit.

it is recognised thatless than idealnot perfectnot identicalslightly problematicrather time-consuming minor defi citslightly disappointingnegligibleunimportantimmateriala preliminary attemptnot signifi cant

necessarilyimpracticalas far as possible(it was) hard to(it was) diffi cult tounavoidableimpossiblenot possible

quite goodreasonably robusthowever*nevertheless*

talk about a solutionfuture work should…future work will…*currently in progresscurrently underway



FA

2.5 Writing a Methodology Section

In the next task, you will bring together and use all the information in this unit. You will write a Methodology section according to the model, using the grammar and vocabulary you have learned, so make sure that you have both the model (Section 2.3.3) and the vocabulary (Section 2.4) in front of you.

In this unit you have seen the conventional model of the Methodology and the vocabulary conventionally used has been collected. Remember that when you write, your sentence patterns should also be conventional, so use the sentence patterns you have seen in the Methodology samples in this unit and in your target articles as models for your writing.

Follow the model exactly this time, and in future, use it to check the Methodology of your work so that you can be sure that the information is in an appropriate order and that you have done what your readers expect you to do in this section.

Although a model answer is provided in the Key, you should try to have your own answer checked by a native speaker of English if possible, to make sure that you are using the vocabulary correctly.

2.5.1 Write a Methodology section

Th e aim of this task is for you to learn how to describe what you did and used so that any reader can repeat exactly what you did and obtain exactly the same result as you obtained. Remember that you are expected to show that you carried out your work with due care and that you had good reasons for doing what you did. Th e message is: Th is is exactly what I did, I did it carefully and I had good reasons for doing it in this way.

To complete the task, imagine that you are writing up a research project which has carried out the fi rst-ever attempt to cook chicken. Imagine that until now, everyone ate it raw. Th e task is to write a recipe for cooking chicken as if it were the Materials/Methods section of a research paper.

As an example, instead of starting by writing something like Cut the chicken into four pieces, you could perhaps start with an overview of the entire procedure, or by giving the source of your chicken. Did you obtain it from a supermarket? Was it supplied by a laboratory facility? You will need to say what you used to cut the chicken up; using an axe gives a very


Methodology — Writing a Methodology Section 89

FA

diff erent result from using a 4 cm Sabatier steel knife! Instead of writing Now put the chicken in a hot oven for about an hour and a half, you should write something like: Th e sample was then placed on a 300 × 600 mm stainless steel sheet and heated in a Panasonic E458 × 500 w standard fan-assisted oven for 90 minutes at 350°C.

Don’t worry if you don’t know how to cook chicken — it doesn’t matter if you report that you cooked it by boiling it in vodka, but you must give the exact quantity and the brand name of the vodka you used, so that your method and results can be replicated by someone else. Remember to use the passive voice and the appropriate tense.

Th e title of the research paper in which you report the new process is: AN APPROACH TO THE PREPARATION OF CHICKEN. Th e Introduction to your paper looks like this:

Introduction

Chicken preparation techniques are used in a range of applications both in homes and in restaurants. Chicken is easily available and can be locally produced in most areas; in addition it is easily digested and low in calories.1

Since Dundee’s pioneering work reporting the ‘natural’ method of chicken preparation (Dundee et al., 1990) in which the chicken was killed and then eaten raw with salt, there have been signifi cant innovations. Much work has been carried out in France in relation to improving the method of slaughtering chickens,2 whereas in the USA researchers have concentrated on improving the size of the bird.3,4 Th e ‘natural’ method is widely used since the time required for the process is extremely short; however, some problems remain unsolved. Th e fl avour of chicken prepared using the Dundee method is oft en considered unpleasant5 and there is a well-documented risk of bacterial infection6 resulting from the consumption of raw meat.

Th e aim of this study was to develop a preparation method that would address these two problems. In this report, we describe the new method, which uses seasoning to improve the fl avour while heating the chicken in order to kill bacteria prior to eating.

Now write the Methodology section of this paper. You should write approximately 250–400 words. If you get stuck and don’t know what to write next, use the model and the vocabulary to help you move forward. Don’t look at the Key until you have fi nished writing.



FA

2.5.2 Key

Here is a sample answer. When you read it, think about which part of the model is represented in each sentence.

Two experiments were carried out using diff erent combinations of seasoning and varying cooking temperatures. A 4.5 kg frozen organic chicken was purchased from Buyrite Supermarket. Buyrite only sell grade ‘A’ chickens approved by the Organic Farmers Association, thus ensuring both the homogeneity of the sample and the quality of the product. Seasonings were obtained from SeasonInc UK and were used as supplied.

According to the method described by Hanks et al. (1998), the chicken was fi rst immersed in freshly boiled water cooled to a temperature of 20°C and was subsequently rinsed thoroughly in a salt solution so as to reduce the level of bacteria on the surface of the chicken.7 In order to obtain two samples of equal size and weight for testing, the chicken was fi rst skinned using a standard BS1709 Skin-o-matic; the fl esh was then removed from the bone with a 4 cm steel Sabatier knife, aft er which it was cut into 3 cm-cubes, each weighing 100 g.

Two of the cubes thus obtained were randomly selected for testing. Th e cubes were dried individually in a Phillips R2D2 Dehydrator for 10 minutes. Immediately aft er removing each cube from the dehydrator it was coated with the selected seasoning mixture8 and left to stand on a glass plate for 30 minutes at room temperature (16°C) in order to enhance absorption of the seasoning prior to heating. Seasoning quantities were measured used standard domestic kitchen scales and were therefore only approximate.

Each cube was then placed on an ovenproof dish and transferred to a pre-heated Panasonic Model 33KY standard electric fan-assisted oven at 150°C for 10 minutes. Th e product was removed from the oven and allowed to come to equilibrium, aft er which the cubes were assessed according to the TTS test developed by Dundee (Dundee, 1997).


unit 2 writing about methodology - multimedia universitypesona.mmu.edu.my/~hairul/files/publication...

Documents